About your Search

20110701
20110731
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
, this is a debate about our economy, and frankly is a big debate about the future of our country. until recently, the president was demanding that the congress increased the debt limit with no strings attached. as a matter of fact, the treasury secretary sent me a letter two days after we were sworn in demanding that we give him a clean increase in the debt limit. i responded and told the treasury secretary at the american people would not tolerate a clean increase in the debt ceiling unless there was serious spending cuts attached and will reform in the way we spent the american people's money. i went to new york city in may and gave a speech to the new york economic club where i outlined the challenges we were facing and i made it clear that we would not increase the debt limit for the cuts that exceeded that increase in the debt limit and that there would be no new taxes and that there would be serious spending reforms put in place. it is time to get serious. i'm confident that the leaders here in the congress can act, the white house will give serious, we will. >> your own aides say that the
and dime the people who need it most but when it comes to war, there's a big, fat blank check. we need to be honest with ourselves. we need to be honest with each other. across the country, the americans, hard working, tax paying citizens who oppose war. they oppose their hard earned dollars being sent overseas to support 10 long years of war. but let me be clear. they do not oppose paying their taxes. they are not anarchists rr anti-government activists. but as conscientious objectors to war these americans want their taxes invested here at home. think want to provide food for the homeless, pave roads and strong schools. they want medicare and social security to exist for their parents, their children and their grandchildren. they want their tax dollars to care for soldiers and their families when they return home. they will see an end and cure to cancer. they want a cure for aids. they want to see small business thrive. and innovation become the en-in of our economy. they want high speed rail like in asia. they want transit systems that are safe and get people where they knead to go.
the big fight's going going to be over the debt ceiling limit. that's where the hard negotiations are going to be put out. and then they will probably be given a new number, and they'll have to revisit that bill that they've worked on in committee and meet the new number. so if that's what happens, it's probably a good thing. host: so first things first. guest: look, here's what each department or each function of government is going to be getting, and then work out what you think you can get, the most bang for the buck, so to speak. host: let's get to calls for you. we're going to begin with a call from los angeles. michelle is a democrat there. you're on for david keating of the club for growth. caller: given that you made the comments about t republican candidate mitt romney has developed an unshakable reputation as a flip-flop per uses federal powers to coerce taxpayers, and tim pawlenty is hard to pin down, who do you like? guest: well, what the club for we haveohas been doing, published a series of white papers on many of the presidential candidates, all of those that have d
of the big package. we think that estimate was given in 2009 and the authors of the estimate think that its low, and we are very concerned that it's going to be much higher than that and we will continue to get much higher than that. and obviously the collection the states and governments that rely on the revenue, but those folks in those little towns across the country that are trying to make a living selling to the people in their community that have an automatic six to 8% price disadvantage simply because the truck is driving out hundred and of packages is having a devastating effect on small and medium-size retailers. i get we too many telephone calls from the country that are in their view being killed by that price differential. >> he raises the point some of the leading proponents of applying the sales tax online or wal-mart and target national retailers who have also been blamed by small retailers for price pressures and that sort of thing. how would you respond to that? >> they are major proponents of this, but they are not alone. i spend a lot of time talking to the after market a
hey that don't does not very big. it is not very expensive to lift the ball up and get it over that bump and let it keep rolling downhill. i am going to invest or if i'm the person involved i'm going to seek investors and keep growing. there are many many situations though where that just doesn't work. it doesn't work because oh you know it is difficult to get anyone ball and what you have to do is old those that ball. than that is a public public -- anybody can roll down that so it may take many of the situations either a public good to appropriate the value of it or at least partially publicly. we see that all over the place. the human genome products as was it example. every pharmaceutical company that would be a good thing to have the genome but it was not going to be something that they could appropriate enough of to make essentially optimal investment. gps. everybody, maybe could have been smart enough to say if we had all the gps satellites up there i can make rockets and all sorts of things. imagine going out to investor saying i'm going to go do that. whatever you can
question was at the time you guys took the survey, the big concern was unit cohesion disruption. in the process of training, which was having no problems, has there been any indication that separate or different from what we talked about in that survey that once we pass training and pass the repeal and this really starts and open services allowed, they will be unit cohesion coin-operated onto the combat. >> as the service chiefs have received information from their leadership, their change of command to include combat areas over the last six months, there has been no distractions from unit cohesion that have been reported. so it has been very, very positive. the information has come from the leadership in this building. >> the obama administration has said they are no longer appealing challenges to doma. if doma were to fall in a circuit court and only partially, you know, be invalidated for a portion of the country, would you have contingency plans to extend benefits to military families, things like military families in those areas? >> well, and my understanding of the adminis
are making it more difficult to get there. so i'm a big fan of the navy with one important exception that is on that saturday in november when we play the army-navy football game. >> having gone from the naval academy into the marine corp., i don't watch that game very often. so -- but it does seem to me that we are at tend of another inevitable historical cycle here when we have extended ground combat deployments that expand the size of the active duty army into the marine corp. at the expense very often of what i would call national strategic assets like our operational navy. i think i'm hearing from you that the same thing i heard from secretary panetta that the 313 ship goal for the navy is a reasonable goal. would that be correct? >> well, my ingaugements over the past three months suggest to me that it is. but again, i think we had a conversation a bit earlier about how do we keep strategy at pace with resource decisions. so that comprehensive strategy review that we're doing should it seems to me re-enforce that or cause it to think differently about it. one of the things i th
are big numbers, but we are looking forward as to how we push the afghan security system to a point where they can take care of themselves and in fact begin to run their country as they should. most of my good colleagues' arguments were better suited for the conversation when he in april with reference to the overall budget. that budget passed, this amount that we're now going to spend on the department of defense fits under the discretionary spending cap that we put in place back in april. the subcommittee on defense appropriations had done their work, allocated their amount of moneys across a lot of priorities, it said yes to this issue, so i rise in opposition to my colleague's amendment and would urge my colleagues to oppose it as well. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from rhode island. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is -- mr. cicilline: mr. chairman, i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: a recorded vote has been
the super rich, wall street corporations, big oil, that seems to be more important than the united states government and preventing the united states government from defaulting on our debts. and let me just remind those who want to cut medicare and dismantle medicare, that's basically what they want to do, medicare recipients did not create the national debt and that is unconscionable to even talk about balancing the budget or paying down the debt on the backs of our most vulnerable populations, including those who are facing living in poverty. and let me remind our republican colleagues again that the congressional black caucus under the leadership of chairman cleaver, congresswoman christensen, congressman bobby scott, already offered a budget answered mentioned it earlier, that would save $5.7 trillion from the deficit, protect our most vulnerable communities and would have ensured the stability of medicare, medicaid and social security and our budget was balanced. so the country's not broke am. we know how we got here. two wars, these massive tax cuts for the very wealthy, wall street
from airports as small as ashville from the airport such as delta county. it's a mixture of big and small airports in best practices in terms what are the kinds of things that are appropriate for each airport. >> all right. again, let me -- i apologize for jumping around. i have a lot of questions in a limited amount of time. you were talking about spending on, for instance, baggage screening equipment. speaking from experience i use at the corpus christi airport. there's three airlines, american continental, regional jets, and southwest with 737's. each individual airline has a screening machine staffed by two tsa agents. we bought three machines for the corpus christi airport, and there's probably a fourth one because delta used to come in there. why couldn't there just be one and a couple tsa agents where there's not that many people there? do we have any clue why we spend multiple -- >> that's a great question. tsa has an electronic baggage screening program to move what they term optimal solutions for each airport. essentially what that means is in many cases they try to re
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)